Secondary Geomorphic Processes and Their Influence on Alluvial Fan Morphology, Channel Behavior and Flood Hazards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Alluvial fans form through primary and secondary geomorphic processes. Primary processes comprise major geomorphic events that build the fan by transporting sediment from the watershed to the fan; these events occur at decadal time scales. Secondary processes include the smaller flood events which recruit little sediment from the watershed but can re‐mobilize and rework sediment already delivered to the fan. The experiments described herein study the effects of secondary processes on alluvial fan morphology and channel behavior. We conducted four experiments, in which alluvial fans were built by alternating between primary events, with high flows and high sediment supply, and secondary events, with moderate flows and no sediment supply. In our experiments, primary events are best described as debris floods and secondary events correspond to smaller floods with much lower sediment concentrations. The duration of the secondary events varied between experiments, but the number and duration of the primary events was held constant keeping the total volume of sediment delivered to the fan the same. We monitored fan gradient, area, channel patterns and avulsions. Experiments with longer secondary events generated larger fans with gentler gradients. In addition, longer secondary events led to increased flow channelization and centralization between primary events. These morphologic changes resulted in fewer avulsions during primary events, which occurred later during the event. These results indicate that changes to the relative duration of primary and secondary events caused by climate change can affect fan morphology, wet fraction, and avulsion frequency, with implications for potential flood hazard.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".